Have you ever thought?

[riskllama]

ha, that article says China is also "dumping" wine(?) on the EU, as well. who the f*ck would buy Chinese wine, especially in Europe.

A friend of mine drank himself to death on Chinese cooking wine.

I once saw this wino eating a sprig of grapes. I was like, dude - you have to wait...
seriously tho, isn't cooking wine supposed to be laden w/salt solely to avoid drunks buying it?

[TA1LGUNN3R]

Why is it that when a company sells at a loss to a consumer within its own country that's just a regular business practice called 'loss leading', whereas when it sells at a loss to a consumer in a different country that's 'dumping' and 'oh ma gerd thems dirty foreigners we should ban urm alllll'?

Actually dumping prices are forbidden in the EU except in special cases, and it wouldn't surprise me if it were the same across the pond.
Though I admit it is hypocritical considering how the west has been selling food to Africa at dumping prices for several decades already. So yeah, measures and counter-measures amongst the powerful I guess.

It's illegal to rob somebody with a gun to their head, yet the government does it everyday. It's all a matter of perspective.

-TG

Actually that's what laws try to avoid, no space for wider interpretations. If "it's all a matter of perspective", you got a lawsystem that looks like swiss cheese.

Then it fails. Every year I'm threatened with force if i don't hand over my money ("tax"). They're so concerned about this tax they take it directly from my salary, and give me scraps if I'm lucky.

My point isn't to rail against taxes, it was to illustrate that things considered illegal or immoral at the individual level are supported at the national, governmental body level. It's silly to call the price dumping "hypocritical" when the whole system is hypocritical.

-TG

[mrswdk]

Why is it that when a company sells at a loss to a consumer within its own country that's just a regular business practice called 'loss leading', whereas when it sells at a loss to a consumer in a different country that's 'dumping' and 'oh ma gerd thems dirty foreigners we should ban urm alllll'?

Actually dumping prices are forbidden in the EU except in special cases, and it wouldn't surprise me if it were the same across the pond.
Though I admit it is hypocritical considering how the west has been selling food to Africa at dumping prices for several decades already. So yeah, measures and counter-measures amongst the powerful I guess.

It's illegal to rob somebody with a gun to their head, yet the government does it everyday. It's all a matter of perspective.

-TG

I was about to say that you are more than welcome to opt out of society and go live homeless somewhere, but then I Googled it any found out that in the UK the state of being homeless is actually a criminal offense (albeit an unenforced one). rofl.

Go live in the woods or something. They won't find you there.

[DoomYoshi]

In Canada we have a right to be homeless as over 90% of our country is crown land. However, they have gotten rid of squatter's rights by a rather ingenious method. It's illegal to camp in the same place for more than 30 days. After 30 days (much later) your rights to claim the land kick in, but you are also living there illegally, making you a felon and therefore not able to accept the land. It doesn't matter since you can't claim the timber or mineral rights anyway, so land in Canada is useless, unless you are a Chinese corporation. Ironic how this thread comes full circle.

[thegreekdog]

Let me give you a little example of what's happening.

Britain is about to lose its last steel manufacturer because of cheap Chinese steel. What happens when it closes and the Chinese have the total monopoly and can raise the price to whatever they want because there's no competition? We've sold so many of our industries that we were world leaders at over the years to feed the stupid rich.

Can't a company come along and start producing steel outside of China? Say in England? I'm not up on my international law, but I'm assuming, unlike domestically, there is no inherent way for a company in one country to monopolize an international industry given that China (and the Chinese steel companies) can't tell England (and the English steel companies) what to do. But I may be wrong considering this seems to be an important issue to you.

Its the equivalent of being the largest stack in poker and going all in. Sure you cant afford to drop your prices for ever, but you can last longer than everyone else. To make it worse the EU does tell English steel what to do, making them impotent to respond.

Yes, it sounds like that has already happened. However, a new player is permitted to join the table.

[The asylum]

Let me give you a little example of what's happening.

Britain is about to lose its last steel manufacturer because of cheap Chinese steel. What happens when it closes and the Chinese have the total monopoly and can raise the price to whatever they want because there's no competition? We've sold so many of our industries that we were world leaders at over the years to feed the stupid rich.

Can't a company come along and start producing steel outside of China? Say in England? I'm not up on my international law, but I'm assuming, unlike domestically, there is no inherent way for a company in one country to monopolize an international industry given that China (and the Chinese steel companies) can't tell England (and the English steel companies) what to do. But I may be wrong considering this seems to be an important issue to you.

I was merely taking the loss of Britains last steel company as an example of how reliant Britain is becoming on other nations.

We have no energy companies that are British owned, all coal mines are closed, the railways have been sold to foreign companies, there's virtually no ship building and the NHS is about to buckle for numerous reasons. Which will mean it will be privatised and probably be under foreign control.

[mrswdk]

Let me give you a little example of what's happening.

Britain is about to lose its last steel manufacturer because of cheap Chinese steel. What happens when it closes and the Chinese have the total monopoly and can raise the price to whatever they want because there's no competition? We've sold so many of our industries that we were world leaders at over the years to feed the stupid rich.

Can't a company come along and start producing steel outside of China? Say in England? I'm not up on my international law, but I'm assuming, unlike domestically, there is no inherent way for a company in one country to monopolize an international industry given that China (and the Chinese steel companies) can't tell England (and the English steel companies) what to do. But I may be wrong considering this seems to be an important issue to you.

I was merely taking the loss of Britains last steel company as an example of how reliant Britain is becoming on other nations.

We have no energy companies that are British owned, all coal mines are closed, the railways have been sold to foreign companies, there's virtually no ship building and the NHS is about to buckle for numerous reasons. Which will mean it will be privatised and probably be under foreign control.

The UK has always been reliant on other nations. The British Empire was able to thrive thanks to the labor of Indian textile workers, the extorted minerals and other resources taken from sub-Saharan Africa and the Carribean, the revenues it made from selling its Indian-grown opium to China, etc. If not for the input of other countries then the UK would still be a damp little island full of Game of Thrones inbreds who live in mud huts and reproduce with their siblings.

[mrswdk]

Anyway, the steel industry is a throwback to the Industrial Revolution which only accounts for about 0.1% of the UK's workforce and 0.1% of the UK's economic output. Who gives a shit?

[The asylum]

Let me give you a little example of what's happening.

Britain is about to lose its last steel manufacturer because of cheap Chinese steel. What happens when it closes and the Chinese have the total monopoly and can raise the price to whatever they want because there's no competition? We've sold so many of our industries that we were world leaders at over the years to feed the stupid rich.

Can't a company come along and start producing steel outside of China? Say in England? I'm not up on my international law, but I'm assuming, unlike domestically, there is no inherent way for a company in one country to monopolize an international industry given that China (and the Chinese steel companies) can't tell England (and the English steel companies) what to do. But I may be wrong considering this seems to be an important issue to you.

I was merely taking the loss of Britains last steel company as an example of how reliant Britain is becoming on other nations.

We have no energy companies that are British owned, all coal mines are closed, the railways have been sold to foreign companies, there's virtually no ship building and the NHS is about to buckle for numerous reasons. Which will mean it will be privatised and probably be under foreign control.

The UK has always been reliant on other nations. The British Empire was able to thrive thanks to utilising minerals and materials other nations were too backward to realise their worth. The British empire helped civilise and give a better standard of living to these backward thinking people and us Asians are especially thankful for their endeavours.

Me so horny, you get ranything you want for 10dollar.

No thanks spotty gimp.

[mrswdk]

In other words, you are of the view that the only reason the UK ever thrived was because it was lucky enough to be the first to develop, and took advantage of that to exploit other parts of the world.

Other nations have now caught up and the UK cannot continue to rely on the same old model of exploitation, but luckily it is good at something else: laundering the world's money through the City of London. For a fee, of course!

So yes, I agree with you that the UK's historic, current and continued prosperity depends upon the contributions of other economies. Good chat ^0^

[riskllama]

dude, shop around - you can't beat that price...

[mrswdk]

I imagine in Portsmouth they would launder your mafia's money for 50p and a packet of Quavers.

[The asylum]

Blah blah blah I hate the English even though I live in their country. I've got no english friends due to my complete lack of personality/self confidence but I've befriended a group of equally uninteresting/unattractive foreign girls at the college I go to and feel a bit better when my warped views seem to arouse my no life dregs of friends.

Me love you long time. I can take your big restern rillies no pwoblem. ^0^

Nah thanks, I imagine you to be one of those greasy little spotty things with yoko Ono glasses and the start of a moustache.

[mrswdk]

You really can't handle it when people disagree with you, can you?

[The asylum]

Sucky sucky me srallor for 5 dollar

I'm just not interested in you baby.

[DoomYoshi]

In other words, you are of the view that the only reason the UK ever thrived was because it was lucky enough to be the first to develop, and took advantage of that to exploit other parts of the world.

Other nations have now caught up and the UK cannot continue to rely on the same old model of exploitation, but luckily it is good at something else: laundering the world's money through the City of London. For a fee, of course!

So yes, I agree with you that the UK's historic, current and continued prosperity depends upon the contributions of other economies. Good chat ^0^

I still refuse to buy any frigate not laid down in Portsmouth!

[mrswdk]

In other words, you are of the view that the only reason the UK ever thrived was because it was lucky enough to be the first to develop, and took advantage of that to exploit other parts of the world.

Other nations have now caught up and the UK cannot continue to rely on the same old model of exploitation, but luckily it is good at something else: laundering the world's money through the City of London. For a fee, of course!

So yes, I agree with you that the UK's historic, current and continued prosperity depends upon the contributions of other economies. Good chat ^0^

I still refuse to buy any frigate not laid down in Portsmouth!

Good man - with your custom to rely on, asylum and his family will never go short of shell suits and multi-packs of potato chips ever again!

[waauw]

Let me give you a little example of what's happening.

Britain is about to lose its last steel manufacturer because of cheap Chinese steel. What happens when it closes and the Chinese have the total monopoly and can raise the price to whatever they want because there's no competition? We've sold so many of our industries that we were world leaders at over the years to feed the stupid rich.

Can't a company come along and start producing steel outside of China? Say in England? I'm not up on my international law, but I'm assuming, unlike domestically, there is no inherent way for a company in one country to monopolize an international industry given that China (and the Chinese steel companies) can't tell England (and the English steel companies) what to do. But I may be wrong considering this seems to be an important issue to you.

I was merely taking the loss of Britains last steel company as an example of how reliant Britain is becoming on other nations.

We have no energy companies that are British owned, all coal mines are closed, the railways have been sold to foreign companies, there's virtually no ship building and the NHS is about to buckle for numerous reasons. Which will mean it will be privatised and probably be under foreign control.

Well dude, either you are a real market economy like the UK is now and have a lot of foreign companies, or you turn into heavily protectionist nation like Japan where you have decades of deflation.

[thegreekdog]

Let me give you a little example of what's happening.

Britain is about to lose its last steel manufacturer because of cheap Chinese steel. What happens when it closes and the Chinese have the total monopoly and can raise the price to whatever they want because there's no competition? We've sold so many of our industries that we were world leaders at over the years to feed the stupid rich.

Can't a company come along and start producing steel outside of China? Say in England? I'm not up on my international law, but I'm assuming, unlike domestically, there is no inherent way for a company in one country to monopolize an international industry given that China (and the Chinese steel companies) can't tell England (and the English steel companies) what to do. But I may be wrong considering this seems to be an important issue to you.

I was merely taking the loss of Britains last steel company as an example of how reliant Britain is becoming on other nations.

We have no energy companies that are British owned, all coal mines are closed, the railways have been sold to foreign companies, there's virtually no ship building and the NHS is about to buckle for numerous reasons. Which will mean it will be privatised and probably be under foreign control.

I'm still confused as to how any of that is a bad thing. Foreign-made products typically mean they are cheaper to purchase (at least, that's what I think every time I see a "they took our jobs" person tweeting on their iphones). If you are concerned with pricing being increased for some reason, again, the free market economy is pretty good with new companies popping up.

I suppose there is a nationalist bent to your concern, which seems to be how it goes in the US. Either that or the aforementioned "they took our jobs."

[The asylum]

Let me give you a little example of what's happening.

Britain is about to lose its last steel manufacturer because of cheap Chinese steel. What happens when it closes and the Chinese have the total monopoly and can raise the price to whatever they want because there's no competition? We've sold so many of our industries that we were world leaders at over the years to feed the stupid rich.

Can't a company come along and start producing steel outside of China? Say in England? I'm not up on my international law, but I'm assuming, unlike domestically, there is no inherent way for a company in one country to monopolize an international industry given that China (and the Chinese steel companies) can't tell England (and the English steel companies) what to do. But I may be wrong considering this seems to be an important issue to you.

I was merely taking the loss of Britains last steel company as an example of how reliant Britain is becoming on other nations.

We have no energy companies that are British owned, all coal mines are closed, the railways have been sold to foreign companies, there's virtually no ship building and the NHS is about to buckle for numerous reasons. Which will mean it will be privatised and probably be under foreign control.

I'm still confused as to how any of that is a bad thing. Foreign-made products typically mean they are cheaper to purchase (at least, that's what I think every time I see a "they took our jobs" person tweeting on their iphones). If you are concerned with pricing being increased for some reason, again, the free market economy is pretty good with new companies popping up.

I suppose there is a nationalist bent to your concern, which seems to be how it goes in the US. Either that or the aforementioned "they took our jobs."

This is where I lose interest. I feel like I'm talking to a nwo fascist that's calling me a nazi for worrying about the future of my country. You don't see that I'm thinking about a loss of skills in certain areas and the ability to be self reliant in the future if there was a war for instance. Britain can't just rely on our banking industry and education system to bring in money. I think the powers that be are being short sighted in the quest for globalisation and are ignoring the signs that there's unrest among the people, as they hasten their plans.

[The asylum]

In other words, you are of the view that the only reason the UK ever thrived was because it was lucky enough to be the first to develop, and took advantage of that to exploit other parts of the world.

Other nations have now caught up and the UK cannot continue to rely on the same old model of exploitation, but luckily it is good at something else: laundering the world's money through the City of London. For a fee, of course!

So yes, I agree with you that the UK's historic, current and continued prosperity depends upon the contributions of other economies. Good chat ^0^

I still refuse to buy any frigate not laid down in Portsmouth!

You want massage? I can do DVD for £2 perflect cwopy all latest fims

[Dukasaur]

Micheal Emerling used to do a great routine about the trade deficit.

"I love the trade deficit!" he would beam. "I love the fact that we send our worthless fiat currency to places like Japan and they send back useful things like microwaves and VCRs."

You should be happy you are sending your debauched fiat currency to China and they are dumb enough to send back useful things like steel girders. Enjoy it while it lasts, and stop whining!

[thegreekdog]

Let me give you a little example of what's happening.

Britain is about to lose its last steel manufacturer because of cheap Chinese steel. What happens when it closes and the Chinese have the total monopoly and can raise the price to whatever they want because there's no competition? We've sold so many of our industries that we were world leaders at over the years to feed the stupid rich.

Can't a company come along and start producing steel outside of China? Say in England? I'm not up on my international law, but I'm assuming, unlike domestically, there is no inherent way for a company in one country to monopolize an international industry given that China (and the Chinese steel companies) can't tell England (and the English steel companies) what to do. But I may be wrong considering this seems to be an important issue to you.

I was merely taking the loss of Britains last steel company as an example of how reliant Britain is becoming on other nations.

We have no energy companies that are British owned, all coal mines are closed, the railways have been sold to foreign companies, there's virtually no ship building and the NHS is about to buckle for numerous reasons. Which will mean it will be privatised and probably be under foreign control.

I'm still confused as to how any of that is a bad thing. Foreign-made products typically mean they are cheaper to purchase (at least, that's what I think every time I see a "they took our jobs" person tweeting on their iphones). If you are concerned with pricing being increased for some reason, again, the free market economy is pretty good with new companies popping up.

I suppose there is a nationalist bent to your concern, which seems to be how it goes in the US. Either that or the aforementioned "they took our jobs."

This is where I lose interest. I feel like I'm talking to a nwo fascist that's calling me a nazi for worrying about the future of my country. You don't see that I'm thinking about a loss of skills in certain areas and the ability to be self reliant in the future if there was a war for instance. Britain can't just rely on our banking industry and education system to bring in money. I think the powers that be are being short sighted in the quest for globalisation and are ignoring the signs that there's unrest among the people, as they hasten their plans.

Me? And NWO fascist? What? I mean, I loved the NWO during the Monday Night Wars, but I'm just a free market kind of guy and generally, at least in the US, see whining about job losses in the manufacturing industry as completely absurd given that the primary protesters are 20-something college kids who would never perform such menial tasks as manufacturing, preferring to live with their parents, not pay their student loans, and surf the internet all day who don't seem to realize that their iphones are affordable (by their parents) because of cheap non-American labor. In other words... these people are either stupid or hypocrits or both.

In any event, yes, I didn't see that you're thinking about a loss of skills in certain areas and the ability to be self-reliant. Those seem to be valid concerns, especially given the apparent unrest.

Do you know why that I didn't see what you were thinking? Because despite my multiple posts trying to understand your point, you didn't actually type out that phrase until this most recent post. Unfortunately, I cannot read minds; I also cannot tease out reasoning from someone I do not interact with on a regular basis who is also from another country. If you get so butthurt over someone asking you questions in a discussion, what is the point of engaging in the discussion in the first place? For f*ck's sake, I'm not even arguing with you, I'm trying to figure out what you're talking about. And, in the post where you tell me what you actually are talking about, you also call me a new world order fascist who is calling you a Nazi because I used the term "nationalism." Seriously. Put on some big boy pants.

[mrswdk]

In any event, yes, I didn't see that you're thinking about a loss of skills in certain areas and the ability to be self-reliant.

Although, unfortunately for asylum (aka the Portsmouth Ship Builders' Lobbying Group) the UK's steel production will continue to be reliant on foreign nations regardless of whether or not the UK keeps its steel mills open. To make steel you need coal and iron ore, both of which the UK has to import from abroad (due to the UK's supplies being both highly limited and prohibitively expensive to mine).

So, the UK can open 100 new steel mills by the end of 2016, but every single one will be dependent on foreign supplies of raw materials, and no amount of nationalization or protectionism will change that.

[mrswdk]

Then again, judging by asylum's input into this thread I'd say he seems to be living in roughly 1895, so I guess from his perspective there is one viable way for the UK to lose its dependence: the invasion and annexation of the Belgian Congo.